Inadmissibility of self-incriminating statements: analysis of judgment no. 28060 of 2024

Judgment no. 28060 of May 16, 2024, filed on July 12, 2024, represents an important ruling on the inadmissibility of evidence in criminal proceedings. In particular, it addresses the issue of statements made to judicial police by a suspect in the absence of a lawyer and without the necessary warnings. This decision is of fundamental importance for understanding how the right to defence can be protected and what the consequences of procedural violations are.

Context of the judgment

The Court of Cassation has ruled that self-incriminating statements made by a suspect in a connected proceeding cannot be used as evidence if the legal guarantees, such as the presence of a lawyer and the due warnings, are lacking. Nevertheless, the Court has specified that the inadmissibility of such statements does not automatically extend to the subsequent interrogation that refers to the initial statements. This aspect is based on the principle that, although a violation has occurred, the subsequent act may not be affected by the same invalidity.

INADMISSIBILITY - Self-incriminating statements made to judicial police by a suspect in a connected proceeding – Absence of defence counsel and lack of prescribed warnings – Inadmissibility – Existence – Propagation to the subsequent formal interrogation that refers to the initial statements – Exclusion – Reasons. In matters of evidence, the inadmissibility of statements made to judicial police by a suspect in a connected proceeding, without having been given the prescribed warnings and in the absence of defence counsel, does not extend to the subsequent formal interrogation of the aforementioned, carried out by referring to the initial statements, as the principle, applicable to nullities, of the transmission of the defect to subsequent acts, dependent on the one declared null, does not operate in this matter.

Legal implications

This judgment is part of a broader debate concerning the protection of suspects' rights in criminal proceedings. Article 63 of the Italian Code of Criminal Procedure establishes that a suspect has the right to be assisted by a lawyer. The lack of such assistance may lead to the invalidity of the statements made, but the Court has clarified that such invalidity does not automatically extend to subsequent acts when these have been carried out in a different context and with the due guarantees.

• Recognition of the right to defence
• Limits to the inadmissibility of evidence
• Distinction between void and valid acts

Conclusions

Judgment no. 28060 of 2024 represents an important step in ensuring a fair balance between the protection of the suspect's rights and the effectiveness of criminal prosecution. It highlights how the lack of legal assistance and procedural defects can compromise the validity of evidence, but also clarifies that not all violations automatically lead to the inadmissibility of subsequent acts. This distinction is crucial for the proper functioning of the legal system and for safeguarding fundamental rights.